SUSI-SUSYANTI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

SUSI-SUSYANTI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused extension and dismissed the 1st Applicant's leave application because the six‑month delay was inordinate, inadequately explained and the intended challenge lacked reasonably arguable grounds. The court granted leave to the 2nd Applicant because it was reasonably arguable that the Board failed to consider child‑specific persecution risk arising from racially mixed parentage and failed to apply high standards of fairness in respect of a minor; the court directed appointment of the Official Solicitor and procedural steps to pursue judicial review.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1520
Parties
1st Applicant: Susi-Susyanti; 2nd Applicant: Susi Susyanti Gabriell Toe Eli Ebuka; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL1551/2020
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non‑refoulement) / Decision on Leave Application and Extension of Time
Outcome
Extension of time refused and 1st Applicant's leave application dismissed; leave granted to 2nd Applicant to apply for judicial review and Official Solicitor appointed to represent the 2nd Applicant; procedural directions given to issue and serve originating summons within 14 days.
Legal Topics
Non‑refoulement, Torture Risk, Persecution, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Minor Representation, Extension of Time
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non‑refoulement Torture Risk Persecution +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Susi-Susyanti

1st Applicant

Susi Susyanti Gabriell Toe Eli Ebuka

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non‑refoulement) / Decision on Leave Application and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for the 1st Applicant's leave application
  2. 2 Whether the Torture Claims Appeal Board erred by failing to consider race‑based persecution risk to the child (2nd Applicant)
  3. 3 Application of high standards of fairness in non‑refoulement determinations involving minors

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused extension and dismissed the 1st Applicant's leave application because the six‑month delay was inordinate, inadequately explained and the intended challenge lacked reasonably arguable grounds. The court granted leave to the 2nd Applicant because it was reasonably arguable that the Board failed to consider child‑specific persecution risk arising from racially mixed parentage and failed to apply high standards of fairness in respect of a minor; the court directed appointment of the Official Solicitor and procedural steps to pursue judicial review.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused and 1st Applicant's leave application dismissed; leave granted to 2nd Applicant to apply for judicial review and Official Solicitor appointed to represent the 2nd Applicant; procedural directions given to issue and serve originating summons within 14 days.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the 1st Applicant’s application for leave to apply for Judicial Review of the decision of Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 18 October 2019 be refused
  • The 1st Applicant’s application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed